New answers tagged lebesgue-integral
1
vote
Accepted
Algebra generated by the set of singletons of an infinite countable set
Note $(A \cup B)'$ is a subset of $B'$. Thus, if $B'$ is finite, then $(A \cup B)'$ is also finite.
2
votes
Accepted
Comparison between the Lebesgue integral of a given function over two different sets.
No, it is not true. You would additionally need that $m(A) \leq m(B)$. For a counterexample, consider $f \equiv 1$ and $A=[0,1]$, $B=\{2\}$.
Edit: with the additional assumption, we can prove the ...
1
vote
Accepted
Well definess of the Lebesgue integral
Start from
$$
\sum_{\varepsilon,\delta}f_{\varepsilon,\delta}\mu(A_\varepsilon \cap B_\delta)=\sum_{\varepsilon}\sum_{k=1}^m\varepsilon_ka_k
\sum_{\delta:A_\varepsilon\cap B_\delta\neq\emptyset}\mu(...
1
vote
Accepted
Simple question that relates Lebesgue measure and Lebesgue integral.
It depends on how you defined the Lebesgue integral, but if you started with integrals of simple functions (as in linear combinations of indicator functions of measurable sets), then your equality is ...
3
votes
Different definitions of the canonical form of simple functions (issue with constant reals different from $0$)
It seems to me that the first definition adds the restriction that $r_k$ are non-zero to make the decomposition unique. If, say, $r_{N+1}$ is allowed to be $0$, one could add it to the sum or discard ...
0
votes
Different definitions of the canonical form of simple functions (issue with constant reals different from $0$)
I think that this restriction it for convenience: if you endow the ambient space with some infinite measure, you just have to say that all the $E_k$ must have finite measure for $\varphi$ to be ...
2
votes
Accepted
$\| f \|_{L^1} > 0 $ is stronger than simply $f \neq 0$. But how much?
Yes; if $\|f\|_p>0$ then $f>0$ on some positive measure set, since otherwise $f=0$ a.e. and hence $\|f\|_p = 0$. Conversely, if $\|f\|_p = 0$ then $f=0$ almost everywhere.
1
vote
Accepted
Lebesgue integral of gradient
If $f$ is merely continuous you can’t say anything even in the one-dimensional case of the fundamental theorem of calculus, as it may not be differentiable. You need $f$ to be absolutely continuous in ...
1
vote
Accepted
Understanding proof of "if $f$ is non-negative, then it is the supremum of simple functions."
For your first question, yes that is true, but I am not sure why that would be helpful in proving $\int_B h \, d\mu \le \sup\{\cdots\}$.
For your second question: This follows from the definition of ...
0
votes
Prove that a family of functions bounded by a $L^1$ function is uniformly integrable: $\varepsilon$-$\delta$ proof
Without loss of generality, $k = 1$. Given $\varepsilon>0$, choose $\delta >0$ such that $$\int_A |g|\leq \varepsilon^2,\quad \mu(A)\leq \delta$$ Then $$\int_A |f_i|\leq\left\{ \int_Af_i^2\right\...
5
votes
Accepted
Is the following operator well-defined?
No, I do not think it is.
And if by your observation that $u$ being square integrable implies it
being finite almost everywhere you mean that it must be bounded
(i.e., $|u(x,t)|\leq k$ for some $k$) ...
Top 50 recent answers are included
Related Tags
lebesgue-integral × 7416measure-theory × 3701
real-analysis × 3475
lebesgue-measure × 1818
integration × 1736
analysis × 671
functional-analysis × 634
lp-spaces × 485
probability-theory × 298
calculus × 255
convergence-divergence × 243
solution-verification × 220
riemann-integration × 206
limits × 183
measurable-functions × 132
probability × 131
improper-integrals × 131
definite-integrals × 119
fourier-analysis × 107
continuity × 105
sequences-and-series × 102
multivariable-calculus × 95
derivatives × 95
sobolev-spaces × 87
complex-analysis × 85